Metaphilosophy 36 (3):348-362 (2005)

Robert Guay
State University of New York at Binghamton
The thesis of this paper is that consequentialism does not work as a comprehensive theory of right action. This paper does not offer a typical refutation, in that I do not claim that consequentialism is self-contradictory. One can with perfect consistency claim that the good is prior to the right and that the right consists in maximizing the good. What I claim, however, is that it is senseless to make such a claim. In particular, I attempt to show that the notion of what course of action maximizes the good has no content within a consequentialist framework. Since the problem that I identify rests with maximization, this refutation does not cut across the act/rule distinction. If rule consequentialism holds that there are occasions on which one should follow a rule rather than violate the rule in an optimific way, then it is not maximizing and my arguments do not apply; if not, then it collapses into act consequentialism. I have nothing to say about nonmaximizing forms of consequentialism.1 This refutation does, however, cut across the direct/indirect distinction.2 It makes no difference whether we take consequentialism as offering a principle of decision, or a standard of right. Presumably the former would be parasitic upon the latter for its legitimacy
Keywords ethics  consequentialism  utilitarianism  integrity
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9973.2005.00373.x
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 68,975
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Utilitarianism: For and Against.J. J. C. Smart & Bernard Williams - 1973 - Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Alienation, Consequentialism, and the Demands of Morality.Peter Railton - 1984 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 13 (2):134-171.
The Problem of Action.Harry G. Frankfurt - 1978 - American Philosophical Quarterly 15 (2):157-162.
The Act Itself.Jonathan Bennett - 1995 - Oxford University Press.
Forms and Limits of Utilitarianism.David Lyons - 1965 - Oxford: Clarendon Press.

View all 10 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Harmful Influence of Decision Theory on Ethics.Sven Ove Hansson - 2010 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 13 (5):585-593.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Consequentialize This.Campbell Brown - 2011 - Ethics 121 (4):749-771.
Consequentialism and Decision Procedures.Toby Ord - 2005 - Dissertation, University of Oxford
Rule-Consequentialism's Dilemma.Iain Law - 1999 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 2 (3):263-276.
Consequentialism, Group Acts, and Trolleys.Joseph Mendola - 2005 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 86 (1):64–87.
7 Consequentialism.Douglas W. Portmore - 2011 - In Christian Miller (ed.), Continuum Companion to Ethics. Continuum. pp. 143.


Added to PP index

Total views
113 ( #102,131 of 2,498,172 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #282,957 of 2,498,172 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes